Is God Really Omniscient?

[SmileyMcGee]

Omniscience seems like a pretty cool thing when viewed from the perspective of someone who knows little and is relying on a being who is omniscient. However, I wonder how great it is for the omniscient being.

 

A particularly fascinating exercise that I would recommend is to imagine a hypothetical universe wherein you know absolutely everything and then work out some of the implications of such complete knowledge. After doing this, it caused me to wonder whether our definition of the omniscience of God is bounded within a specific domain of knowledge, and if so, what that domain may be. 

 

Assuming that I were a god whose domain of knowledge is without bound, here are a few concerns I would have:

 

1. My existence would likely be paralyzingly boring, and, by extension, miserable

2. I would envy those who possess uncertainty

3. If I really loved someone I would probably not want them to be like me

4. I would no longer believe in agency

 

Does the church teach, or do members believe in a God that is truly omniscient? Any thoughts on what it would be like to be omniscient?

[Calm]

"My existence would likely be paralyzingly boring, and, by extension, miserable"

I think this ignores how some of our most happy moments are repeating those things we like best. And if one's experience as God is infinitely more nuanced, more aware, more embracing, i don't see how even eternity would cause boredom...especially with infinite variety of choices to be made for what to do that day.

The more knowledge one has, the more agency one possesses. God is the most fully free being there is. He is aware of the implications and consequences of his choices. He can choose exactly what he wants as opposed to hoping he is somewhat in the ball park.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Calm

[Jeanne]

In today's world..well, even in the past, is it okay for me to question what God wants?

[Robert F. Smith]

God our Father is finite and bounded by natural law, yet He is eternally progressing in knowledge, progeny, and glory.  His potential is infinite in scope.

[SmileyMcGee]

God our Father is finite and bounded by natural law, yet He is eternally progressing in knowledge, progeny, and glory. His potential is infinite in scope.

Any references for this? That God is still progressing in knowledge?

As for God being bounded by natural law, I would have to object based on several events in the scriptures. However, I guess the rebuttal would be "well, we don't have a full understanding of natural law."

[The Nehor]

The idea that God is not omniscient is prominent amongst LDS but it flies in the face of scripture.

[Teancum]

God our Father is finite and bounded by natural law, yet He is eternally progressing in knowledge, progeny, and glory.  His potential is infinite in scope.

So is he omniscient?

McConkie taught it was heresy to say God is eternally progressing in knowledge. I agree that a being who we rely on for our salvation who may still be progressing in knowledge poses some problems.

[Teancum]

The idea that God is not omniscient is prominent amongst LDS but it flies in the face of scripture.

I agree.

[Crypto]

I can relate. For someone who loves to learn new things, my #1 hobby would disappear.

The excitement from uncertainty in sports would lose it's appeal, but I guess the possibility of spending time together in an activity could also be enjoyable.

I like designing things to though. I guess that could be something to do.

[Robert F. Smith]

Any references for this? That God is still progressing in knowledge?

.....................................................................................

The best discussion is Eugene England, “Perfection and Progression: Two Complementary Ways to Talk about God,” BYU Studies, 29/3 (Summer 1989):31-47, online at http://eugeneengland.org/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/1989_e_001.pdf , based on his 1980 manuscript “The Perfection and Progression of God: Two Spheres of Existence and Two Modes of Discourse,” 

[Robert F. Smith]

..............................................................................

As for God being bounded by natural law, I would have to object based on several events in the scriptures. However, I guess the rebuttal would be "well, we don't have a full understanding of natural law."

You might want to explore JeremyOrbe-Smith's “Towards Naturalistic Deities,” on this board, online at http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/56068-towards-naturalistic-deities/ .

[Robert F. Smith]

So is he omniscient?

McConkie taught it was heresy to say God is eternally progressing in knowledge. I agree that a being who we rely on for our salvation who may still be progressing in knowledge poses some problems.

Depends on whether you believe in a static or a dynamic God.  They are not the same.  The one is impassible, immutable, and non-temporal, while the other is passible, mutable, and temporal -- at least in some very important respects.

 

Indeed, the notion of an open canon and continuing revelation is compatible with, or suggestive of an “open system” of theology in the very unsystematic sense suggested by Alfred North Whitehead, William James, Charles Hartshorne, and others, i.e., process theology, as applied to Restoration theology by Garland E. Tickemyer, "Joseph Smith and Process Theology," Dialogue, 17 (Autumn 1984):75-85, online at https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V17N03_77.pdf;

See also

Robert Mesle, Process Theology: A Basic Introduction (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 1993);

Blake Ostler, AIntelligence and Creativity: Ultimates in Mormonism and Process Theology,@ panel presentation August 12, 2004 at Sunstone Salt Lake Symposium;

Philip Clayton, AGod Beyond Orthodoxy: Process Theology for the 21st Century,@ paper presented May 21, 2009, at the SMPT Conference at the Claremont Colleges;

Dan Wotherspoon, AProcess Theology and MormonismB Connections and Challenges,@ paper presented March 30, 2006, at UVSC Conference on AMormonism and the Christian Tradition.@

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

The words 'omniscient' and 'omniscience' do not appear a single time in scripture.

 

So, no.  

 

Other words that do not appear in scripture a single time are: Absolute, Omnipresent, Changeless, Co-equal, Consubstantial, Inerrant, Indivisible, Ineffable, Incorporeal, Intangible, Immaterial, Immanent, Impassible, Immutable, Monotheism, Polytheism, Supernatural, Timeless, Transcendent, Trinity, and Unlimited.  

As far as I can see, the God of the Philosophers (which the New Atheists have conveniently debunked for my generation) is an incoherent monster. A limited, timebound, finite, not-all-powerful God who is coeternal with all other uncreated intelligences is the only one with even a hope of offering a satisfying Theodicy. 

"According to [one] theory, God can progress no further in knowledge and power; but the God that I serve is progressing eternally, and so are his children: they will increase to all eternity, if they are faithful." -- Brigham Young. Journal of Discourses 11:286-287

 

"If there was a point where man in his progression could not proceed any further, the very idea would throw a gloom over every intelligent and reflecting mind. God himself is increasing and progressing in knowledge, power, and dominion, and will do so, worlds without end. It is just so with us." --Wilford Woodruff, Journal of Discourses 6:120

[Duncan]

 

The words 'omniscient' and 'omniscience' do not appear a single time in scripture.

 

So, no.

 

Other words that do not appear in scripture a single time are: Absolute, Omnipresent, Changeless, Co-equal, Consubstantial, Inerrant, Indivisible, Ineffable, Incorporeal, Intangible, Immaterial, Immanent, Impassible, Immutable, Monotheism, Polytheism, Supernatural, Timeless, Transcendent, Trinity, and Unlimited.  

As far as I can see, the God of the Philosophers (which the New Atheists have conveniently debunked for my generation) is an incoherent monster. A limited, timebound, finite, not-all-powerful God who is coeternal with all other uncreated intelligences is the only one with even a hope of offering a satisfying Theodicy. 

"According to [one] theory, God can progress no further in knowledge and power; but the God that I serve is progressing eternally, and so are his children: they will increase to all eternity, if they are faithful." -- Brigham Young. Journal of Discourses 11:286-287

 

"If there was a point where man in his progression could not proceed any further, the very idea would throw a gloom over every intelligent and reflecting mind. God himself is increasing and progressing in knowledge, power, and dominion, and will do so, worlds without end. It is just so with us." --Wilford Woodruff, Journal of Discourses 6:120

 

 

I agree with Elder McConkie, if God is progressing in knowledge will he one day discover something that will unravel the plan of salvation? But maybe the word that Pres. Woodruff uses "knowledge" is used differently than Elder McConkie is using it. In other words if God is progressing in knowledge but it's only about his future children and not about discovering how he became to be and what his life is like and how his children are saved

[The Nehor]

 

The words 'omniscient' and 'omniscience' do not appear a single time in scripture.

 

So, no.

 

Other words that do not appear in scripture a single time are: Absolute, Omnipresent, Changeless, Co-equal, Consubstantial, Inerrant, Indivisible, Ineffable, Incorporeal, Intangible, Immaterial, Immanent, Impassible, Immutable, Monotheism, Polytheism, Supernatural, Timeless, Transcendent, Trinity, and Unlimited.  

As far as I can see, the God of the Philosophers (which the New Atheists have conveniently debunked for my generation) is an incoherent monster. A limited, timebound, finite, not-all-powerful God who is coeternal with all other uncreated intelligences is the only one with even a hope of offering a satisfying Theodicy. 

 

You won't find the word 'theodicy' in scripture so obviously that makes any god that can offer a satisfying one also a god of philosophers.

 

And then we have that pestilent apostate Nephi arguing that God does know all things:

 

"But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things." 2 Nephi 2:24

 

Clearly the poor fellow was infected with Neo-Platonic Greek propaganda.

[filovirus]

From the topical guide. Plenty of scriptures to read and to make an informed decision:

God, Omniscience of

See also God, Foreknowledge of ; God, Intelligence of ; God, Wisdom of

God saw … every imagination of the thoughts of his heart: Gen. 6:5 .

I know him, that he will command his children: Gen. 18:19 .

Lord is a God of knowledge: 1 Sam. 2:3 .

Lord looketh on the heart: 1 Sam. 16:7 .

Lord searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all: 1 Chr. 28:9 .

thou only knowest the hearts of the children of men: 2 Chr. 6:30 . ( Acts 1:24 ; Acts 15:8 . )

he knoweth the way that I take: Job 23:10 .

he knoweth the secrets of the heart: Ps. 44:21 . ( Luke 16:15 . )

Lord knoweth the thoughts of man: Ps. 94:11 .

Thou … art acquainted with all my ways: Ps. 139:3 .

Great is our Lord … his understanding is infinite: Ps. 147:5 .

eyes of the Lord are in every place: Prov. 15:3 .

I know their works and their thoughts: Isa. 66:18 .

thou, O Lord, knowest me: Jer. 12:3 .

I the Lord search the heart: Jer. 17:10 . ( Rev. 2:23 . )

I know the things that come into your mind: Ezek. 11:5 .

your Father knoweth what things ye have need of: Matt. 6:8 .

Jesus knowing their thoughts said: Matt. 9:4 .

sparrows … shall not fall on the ground without your Father: Matt. 10:29 .

Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things: John 13:3 .

are we sure that thou knowest all things: John 16:30 .

Known unto God are all his works from the beginning: Acts 15:18 . ( 1 Ne. 9:6 . )

hath determined the times before appointed: Acts 17:26 .

wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable: Rom. 11:33 .

Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise: 1 Cor. 3:20 .

In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom: Col. 2:3 .

word of God … is a discerner of the thoughts: Heb. 4:12 .

I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience: Rev. 2:2 .

I know thy works, that thou hast a name: Rev. 3:1 .

before it came to pass I showed them thee: 1 Ne. 20:5 .

wisdom of him who knoweth all things: 2 Ne. 2:24 .

God … knoweth all things, and there is not anything save he knows: 2 Ne. 9:20 . ( Morm. 8:17 ; D&C 127:2 . )

reveal all things from the foundation of the world: 2 Ne. 27:10 .

I know all their works: 2 Ne. 27:27 .

by the help of the all-powerful Creator … I can tell you concerning your thoughts: Jacob 2:5 .

Lord knoweth all things which are to come: W of M 1:7 .

Spirit knoweth all things: Alma 7:13 .

Art thou that Great Spirit, who knows all things: Alma 18:18 .

he knows all the thoughts and intents of the heart: Alma 18:32 . ( D&C 6:16 . )

all wisdom, and all understanding; he comprehendeth all things: Alma 26:35 .

ye cannot hide your crimes from God: Alma 39:8 .

God knoweth all these things: Alma 40:5 .

God knoweth all the times which are appointed unto man: Alma 40:10 .

except he was a god he could not know of all things: Hel. 9:41 .

I know your thoughts, and ye have desired the thing which John … desired: 3 Ne. 28:6 .

Lord … showed unto the brother of Jared all the inhabitants of the earth: Ether 3:25 .

God knowing all things, being from everlasting: Moro. 7:22 .

I have told you things which no man knoweth: D&C 6:24 . ( D&C 15:3 . )

knoweth all things, for all things are present before mine eyes: D&C 38:2 .

whose hearts I know: D&C 67:1 .

he comprehended all things, that he might be in all: D&C 88:6 . ( D&C 88:41 . )

mine eyes see and know all their works: D&C 121:24 .

all things for their glory are manifest: D&C 130:7 .

all things are present with me, for I know them all: Moses 1:6 .

all things are numbered unto me, for … I know them: Moses 1:35 .

Lord … told Enoch all the doings of the children of men: Moses 7:41 .

Lord showed Enoch all things: Moses 7:67 .

I know the end from the beginning: Abr. 2:8 .

See also Job 21:22 ; Job 42:2 ; Isa. 41:26 ; Isa. 46:10 ; Isa. 48:3 ; Isa. 55:8–9 ; Isa. 59:1 ; Jer. 33:3 ; Dan. 2:28 ; Matt. 6:6 ; Luke 12:6 ; John 6:64 ; John 14:26 ; John 16:13 ; Eph. 1:8 ; 1 Ne. 10:19 ; Jacob 2:10 ; Mosiah 27:31 ; 3 Ne. 13:6 ; 3 Ne. 26:3 ; Morm. 8:34–35 ; Moro. 10:5 ; D&C 1:1 ; Moses 7:4, 36 ; Abr. 3:19, 21

[thesometimesaint]

God may know everything, but we sure don't. Ours is but a thimbles worth of knowledge in vast oceans of our ignorance.

Edited September 28, 2015 by thesometimesaint

[mnn727]

Do LDS teach it? yes

Is it doctrinal - probably

Is it true? - I personally doubt it

Edited September 28, 2015 by mnn727

[Gray]

Omniscience seems like a pretty cool thing when viewed from the perspective of someone who knows little and is relying on a being who is omniscient. However, I wonder how great it is for the omniscient being.

 

A particularly fascinating exercise that I would recommend is to imagine a hypothetical universe wherein you know absolutely everything and then work out some of the implications of such complete knowledge. After doing this, it caused me to wonder whether our definition of the omniscience of God is bounded within a specific domain of knowledge, and if so, what that domain may be. 

 

Assuming that I were a god whose domain of knowledge is without bound, here are a few concerns I would have:

 

1. My existence would likely be paralyzingly boring, and, by extension, miserable

2. I would envy those who possess uncertainty

3. If I really loved someone I would probably not want them to be like me

4. I would no longer believe in agency

 

Does the church teach, or do members believe in a God that is truly omniscient? Any thoughts on what it would be like to be omniscient?

 

Regarding being bored, I think that depends entirely upon how the brain of God might work. Can God get bored? Or if He can't, is he not omnipotent?

[Gray]

 

As far as I can see, the God of the Philosophers (which the New Atheists have conveniently debunked for my generation) is an incoherent monster. A limited, timebound, finite, not-all-powerful God who is coeternal with all other uncreated intelligences is the only one with even a hope of offering a satisfying Theodicy. 

 

 

If that's the goal, then pantheism probably offers the neatest solution. At least I think so. 

 

The problem with a finite God is that it leaves us without any explanation for why anything exists in the first place (ditto for pantheism and atheism). But the infinite and anthropomorphic God (uncaused cause, mainstream Christian God) leaves us with an unsolvable problem of evil.  

[SmileyMcGee]

"My existence would likely be paralyzingly boring, and, by extension, miserable"

I think this ignores how some of our most happy moments are repeating those things we like best. And if one's experience as God is infinitely more nuanced, more aware, more embracing, i don't see how even eternity would cause boredom...especially with infinite variety of choices to be made for what to do that day.

The more knowledge one has, the more agency one possesses. God is the most fully free being there is. He is aware of the implications and consequences of his choices. He can choose exactly what he wants as opposed to hoping he is somewhat in the ball park.

Can you be more specific regarding the repeating of "things we like best?" Perhaps even provide examples? Regardless, I would argue that if you were indeed omniscient you would get zero utility from actually "doing" the things you like best. 

 

As to the relationship between agency and omniscience, I don't believe they can exist at the same time. It seems to me that omniscience, without bounds, would imply a future that is fixed. For example, if I hypothetically existed in a universe in which I was completely omniscient, I would know every future decision that I would make. Now let's assume that the universe in which I am omniscient is like ours and, being omniscient, I know that in 5 days (assuming some human-like measure of time) that I will travel to Earth. Do I have a choice to go to Earth in 5 days, or can I instead choose to go to Mars in 5 days? If i have the ability to choose to go to Mars and indeed end up going to Mars, I may have agency, but I do not have omniscience, since I in fact went to Mars when I "knew" that I would go to Earth. If, on the other hand, I knew that in five days I was to go to Earth and was powerless to do anything but go to Earth, I would argue that agency does not exist. My future would essentially be predetermined. In short, it seems a being can be all-knowing or all-powerful, but not both.   

Edited September 28, 2015 by SmileyMcGee

[jkwilliams]

Can you be more specific regarding the repeating of "things we like best?" Perhaps even provide examples? Regardless, I would argue that if you were indeed omniscient you would get zero utility from actually "doing" the things you like best. 

 

As to the relationship between agency and omniscience, I don't believe they can exist at the same time. It seems to me that omniscience, without bounds, would imply a future that is fixed. For example, if I hypothetically existed in a universe in which I was completely omniscient, I would know every future decision that I would make. Now let's assume that the universe in which I am Omnipotent is like ours and, being omniscient, I know that in 5 days (assuming some human-like measure of time) that I will travel to Earth. Do I have a choice to go to Earth in 5 days, or can I instead choose to go to Mars in 5 days? If i have the ability to choose to go to Mars and indeed end up going to Mars, I may have agency, but I do not have omniscience, since I in fact went to Mars when I "knew" that I would go to Earth. If, on the other hand, I knew that in five days I was to go to Earth and was powerless to do anything but go to Earth, I would argue that agency does not exist. My future would essentially be predetermined. In short, it seems a being can be all-knowing or all-powerful, but not both.   

 

Reminds me of an episode of the Twilight Zone where this gangster is killed and taken by an escort to what he thinks is heaven. He gets everything he wants. He wins every game at gambling. Every woman he finds attractive is immediately attracted to him. Nothing can go wrong for him, and it's the certainty that takes all the mystery and all the joy out of living. He tells his escort that he never thought heaven would be like this. The escort, whom he had taken for a guardian angel, asks him, "Who told you this was heaven?"

 

It seems to me that in LDS theology, a Creator would have to experience joy and sorrow and all the other aspects of life vicariously, but yes, if He/She were omniscient, the sorrow and joy would be constantly present.

[toon]

The idea that God is not omniscient is prominent amongst LDS but it flies in the face of scripture.

 

And I, the Lord God, called unto Adam, and said unto him: Where goest thou?

 

Not necessarily.

 

I think there's plenty of evidence in the Old Testament of a god that is neither omniscient nor omnipotent.  This is also reflected in the Moses.

 

I'll agree that there are also other passages that indicate otherwise.

 

I think it can at least in part be reconciled as an understanding that, when compared to human limitations, God seems omnipotent and omniscient.  Men wrote the books that eventually became recognized as scripture, and consequently, scripture reflects human's limited understanding and relationship with God.  If God seems omniscient and omnipotent, you'll write that He is omniscient and omnipotent, even though that might not be in fact the case.

[SmileyMcGee]

The best discussion is Eugene England, “Perfection and Progression: Two Complementary Ways to Talk about God,” BYU Studies, 29/3 (Summer 1989):31-47, online at http://eugeneengland.org/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/1989_e_001.pdf , based on his 1980 manuscript “The Perfection and Progression of God: Two Spheres of Existence and Two Modes of Discourse,” 

It seems that Eugene England is advocating domain- (or what he would refer to as a "sphere") specific omniscience. I think that belief is more comforting than unbounded omniscience. 

Edited September 28, 2015 by SmileyMcGee

[SmileyMcGee]

 

The words 'omniscient' and 'omniscience' do not appear a single time in scripture.

 

So, no.

 

 

I can't tell if this is a joke...